I usually want to see a close, competitive Super Bowl, but

[steelclaw]

Yeah and Le Kevin Smith is solely to blame for the Texas Tech loss in 2005.

I understand that the sudden death format can be annoying...but I find it a tad bit simple to blame a game on a format. Just as I find it ridiculous to blame a game on an official, a player, or a play. I'm guessing at some point in your life you played football and that is why you are drawn to this board. If that's true, you know football is an ultimate team game, and no single play, call, or particular scenario leads to the ultimate outcome. There can be multiple swings in momentum during a game because one simple play can be overcome. Atlantas play calling (and play making) is what lead to overtime. One more first down on third and 1, or not taking a 10 yard sack, and the outcome could be much much different.

The point of my post isn't to call you in particular out. I just get tired of the idea that one small format (one that has been known in football for years and has never happened in the super bowl) is the reason that someone wants to say a team loses. They didn't lose because of the format. They lost because they made less plays when it mattered. I wanted Atlanta to win too. I love rooting for the underdog. But they found a way to lose, something we as Nebraska fans should be all familiar with over the past decade plus...

It's really not a sudden death. The Falcons hold them to three, they get a shot.

 

[c2o]

It was reported that brady was trashing the locker room at half

It worked.
We got to watch the greatest QB of all time doing what he do.

 

[Hoosker Du]

Yeah and Le Kevin Smith is solely to blame for the Texas Tech loss in 2005.

I understand that the sudden death format can be annoying...but I find it a tad bit simple to blame a game on a format. Just as I find it ridiculous to blame a game on an official, a player, or a play. I'm guessing at some point in your life you played football and that is why you are drawn to this board. If that's true, you know football is an ultimate team game, and no single play, call, or particular scenario leads to the ultimate outcome. There can be multiple swings in momentum during a game because one simple play can be overcome. Atlantas play calling (and play making) is what lead to overtime. One more first down on third and 1, or not taking a 10 yard sack, and the outcome could be much much different.

The point of my post isn't to call you in particular out. I just get tired of the idea that one small format (one that has been known in football for years and has never happened in the super bowl) is the reason that someone wants to say a team loses. They didn't lose because of the format. They lost because they made less plays when it mattered. I wanted Atlanta to win too. I love rooting for the underdog. But they found a way to lose, something we as Nebraska fans should be all familiar with over the past decade plus...

The LaKevin Smith example was really a terrible example, because the game was won or lost on the field. That's all anyone can ask for. And a coin didn't determine who would have an advantage. And make no mistake, winning the coin flip puts a team in a decided advantage over the other team in OT.

Since we're talking about simple examples, here's one.. There is NO difference between flipping a coin in OT and the team that gets the ball going down and scoring a TD and winning the game....or...flipping a coin at the start of the game, and giving the winner of the flip the ball, to allow them to win it in the first series of the game. How fair is that? No difference whatsoever. Both teams are tied at the beginning of the game, or have played to a tie. If anything, a team has earned the right for the rules to be fair to both teams, because they've played the other team to a tired after 4 quarters.

It's been the worst rule in sports for quite some time and it needs to be changed.